Evaluating changes in electronic gambling machine policy on user losses in an Australian jurisdiction

Abstract

Background Electronic gambling machines (EGMs) are in casinos and community venues (hotels and clubs) in all jurisdictions in Australia, except Western Australia (only in casino). EGMs have a range of features that can affect how people gamble, which can influence losses incurred by users. The Northern Territory Government recently changed two EGM policies – the introduction of note acceptors on EGMs in community venues, and an increase in the cap from 10 to 20 EGMs in hotels and 45 to 55 in clubs. This study evaluates two changes in EGM policy on user losses in community venues, and tracks changes in user losses per adult, EGM gambler, and EGM problem/moderate risk gambler between 2005 and 2015. Methods Trends in venue numbers, EGM numbers, user losses and user losses per EGM by venue type and size are presented to determine if EGM policy changes affected user losses. Data from the 2005 and 2015 NT gambling surveys are used to determine EGM user losses per adult, per EGM gambler, and per EGM problem and/or moderate risk gambler, with several assumptions applied. Results From 2010 (post smoking ban) to 2013 real user losses were stagnant, but from 2013 to 2017, real user losses in community venues increased 19, 9, 8 and 5% per annum, with increases higher in clubs and hotels with the maximum allowable number of EGMs. Over the same period user losses in the two casinos declined by 13%. Between 2005 and 2015, estimated user losses per EGM problem/moderate risk and problem gambler increased by 5 and 34% respectively. Conclusions The analysis demonstrates that reductions in how much money gamblers can insert into an EGM (load-up limit), and/or the abolition of note acceptors, and reductions in the number of EGMs in venues is likely to reduce harm from EGM use. Given the demonstrated inability for Australian jurisdictions to identify and implement effective harm prevention and minimisation interventions, a national approach to gambling regulation in Australia may be desirable. Similarly, national co-ordination of research, particularly on EGMs and online betting is required to better understand changes in gambling policy on related harms.

“It started 30 years ago, and it still haunts me”: an exploratory investigation of Territorians’ gambling behaviours, harm, and help-seeking for gambling issues in an Australian jurisdiction

“…Further, a study published in 2019 looked at the effect of the change in load-up on EGM losses in the NT, and found strong evidence that the change in load-up led to increases in losses for EGM gamblers experiencing problem gambling [ 44 ]. In the 4 years following the installation of note acceptors on to NT EGM, user losses increased in community venues from $65 million to $96 million (more than 50% increase), while in preceding years user losses had been steady or in decline [ 26 ].…”

The development and implementation of electronic gambling machine policy: a qualitative study of local government policy makers

“…The more recent policy responses from the participants involved in this study reflected an understanding of the complexity of the drivers of EGM harm, including the role of environmental (such as the density of EGMs in lower socioeconomic areas) and commercial (such as the structural characteristics of machines, and venue opening hours) drivers of harm. This paradigm shift may reflect the broader shifts in academic research and policy approaches that have challenged the effectiveness of ‘responsible gambling’ approaches 15,17,31 ; provided evidence about the broader determinants of EGM harm 10,13,32 ; demonstrated the impact of EGM harm on individuals, their families, and communities 33,34 ; and outlined how a public health approach would contribute to more effective EGM prevention and harm reduction strategies 2,35 . What is less clear from this research is why there continues to be a lag for some LGAs in moving towards a public health approach to gambling.…”

Statistical risk warnings in gambling

“…Just like a public health approach to alcohol or other risky products, we recommend that any implementation of statistical risk warnings should be considered alongside other potential interventions, such as more restrictive changes to the gambling product experience (Palmer du Preez et al, 2016;Byrne & Russell, 2019;Stevens & Livingstone, 2019), attempts to improve gamblers' decision-making skills more broadly (Williams & Connolly, 2006;Broussard & Wulfert, 2019), personalized interventions for those who have suffered high losses (Jonsson et al, 2019) and product-specific warnings for uniquely harmful products (Ginley et al, 2017).…”